About the Journal - Cities Institute

lies is in the general term „renewal‟ – i.e. replacing worn out or updating venues,
image, economy, tourism offer etc., including repositioning „old culture‟ (heritage)
for contemporary culture and entertainment - and the shift from arts and culture to
the expansive creative industries (Campbell, 2011). Cultural tourism and postindustrial
economics therefore drive this universal tendency, which is also fuelled by
the globalisation of cultural intermediary activity - curators, architects, artistic
directors - which has in turn enabled the growth of, and opportunity for cities to
develop culture city strategies and festivals - at an imported price. Manifestations
include the growth of biennales (over 140 worldwide) and cultural festivals, including
the European and national city/capital of culture initiative, and the ubiquitous art
museum.
Regeneration, not just Renewal
However, renewal (and the US „revitalisation‟) must be distinguished from
regeneration which is more associated with extremes of social decline, multiple
deprivation and disadvantage and in economic terms, below-average
performance (for EU Regional Structural Fund eligibility, below 75% of the EU -
average). Regeneration therefore responds to a degree of sustained degeneration,
defined as the transformation of a community or place that has displayed the
symptoms of environmental (physical), social and/or economic decline. What has
been described as: „breathing new life and vitality into an ailing community, industry
and area [bringing] sustainable, long term improvements to local quality of life,
including economic, social and environmental needs‟ (in Evans and Shaw, 2004).
Mainstream regeneration programmes such as central government Single
Regeneration Budget (SRB), New Deal for Communities (NDC) and their
predecessors originating in the 1970s – the European Structural Development Fund
(ERDF) and European Social Funding (ESF) - have traditionally lacked a cultural
dimension and „culture‟ is not one of the key domains that feature in how
improvement is measured and regeneration investment is assessed (Evans, 2005).
Culture, however, touches the mainstream in economic terms - through creative
industries and tourism sector employment, which often serve as proxies for „culture‟
in economic development - and in social terms (social cohesion and capital and
quality of life) and most explicitly in physical regeneration through cultural facilities,
icons and public facilities, including infrastructure. Transport infrastructure - airports,
bridges, light rail and metros feature highly in cities using culture as part of their
place-making plans and have been a fundamental prerequisite in putting cultural
quarters and cities on the map, for example, Bilbao, Salford Quays, Gateshead and
La Defense, Paris.
The distinction between the „city of renewal‟ – to which all places eventually look in
order to survive economically - and the „city of regeneration‟, is therefore important
when evaluating culture and regeneration policy and impacts. CoCs and Festival
Cities whilst sharing some common goals display quite different rationales for
„renewal and regeneration‟. For example, the small historic city of Bruges (CoC 2002)
in contrast to, say, Glasgow (1990) and Liverpool‟08, or when compared with capital
cities of culture such as Madrid (1992), Copenhagen, (1996), or Dublin (1991). The
latter are often playing catch-up with their major cultural facilities, quarters and city
7